Posted - 10/01/2013 : 16:56:47 Who won the Phil Kessel $64 million / 8 year signing with the Leafs?

40 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First)

Alex116

Posted - 10/30/2013 : 15:39:15

quote:Originally posted by nuxfan

quote:Originally posted by The Duke

Going off topic........nuxfan and Alex .....why didn't van. Re-sign mason Raymond ??......big loss for the Canucks and big gain for the leafs.....damn I love his play for the leafs so far....he plays the game so smart, plus with speed and skill.

They didn't resign him because he was wildly inconsistent, and he would have cost too much. He had several years to prove himself, but could not maintain any level of consistency. He was also making 2.2 million, and was unlikely to stay for much less. TOR got him for a very reasonable salary, and only after every other team passed on him as well. I believe TOR was the only team to offer him a tryout

I liked Raymond, he ha some skill and great speed. When he is on, he is very good. when he is cold, he is not very useful

Very well said Nux. Duke, i think i even commented in a thread mentioning his signing that i thought it was a good move for the Leafs and that if nothing else, his speed and PK ability is pretty good, providing he stays healthy. He seems to have found a nice spot on the Leafs and is contributing. I too am happy for him as he seems like a really good guy.

He was given every opportunity here to seize a top 6 roll and failed to do so. I think he'd have been on a very short leash with Torts as well and he seems to have found some chemistry with the guys he's playing with in TO. Bolland has been his centre i believe and he too is off to a great start for the Leafs which obviously helps. I would love to listen in to a conversation between these two re the old Vancouver/Chicago rivalry they used to compete against one another in!!! Anyway, glad he's doing well and hope he finds the consistency he lacked here, however, you need to keep in mind his playoff numbers aren't very good at 8Gs and 10A in 55 playoff games and we all know how you value those. Man, against those big bad Bruins you compared the Sedin's and Kessel vs, all Raymond did was get crunched into the boards, breaking his back in the process. I mean, what a wimp. I guess he won't be any use to the Leafs in April? (*sarcasm warning*)

Alex116

Posted - 10/30/2013 : 15:25:31

quote:Originally posted by CrockOShight

Awesome Alex.

So, I just want to summarize your argument here. You're asking me not to use a sample size of... (how long has it been... 150 straight games that Phil Kessel has been at a PPG pace?).

This will be my last attempt to try to get through to you. From your response, it's clear to me you still don't have the slightest clue as to where i stand on this debate. Your summarizing of my argument is somehow that i'm asking you not to use a 150 game sample size? Where did i imply that? I've not even questioned whether or not Kessel is a PPG guy and this is what you have concluded somehow? Please feel free to explain.

quote:Originally posted by CrockOShight

But then, your main argument against hinges on ONE PLAY. One play which seems to be debatable on top of it.

NO! Not even frickin' close. My main argument is not based on ONE PLAY! Do you even know what my main point is in this debate??? BTW, it's hardly debatable, it WAS a 2 on 1 and wouldn't have been if Kessel had made the right play defensively. Maybe he misjudged the distance and thought he could get a stick AND get back in time to defend? Maybe it's the first defensive lapse he's made all year? I dunno? But i do know that my main argument doesn't "hinge on this ONE PLAY".

quote:Originally posted by CrockOShight

Sure, the Oilers completely suck this year. But that doesn't take away from Phil Kessel's performance from last night. He just absolutely ruined The Oilers. That was a performance for the ages. The only reason he didn't put up 6 points, is because he didn't play in the third. It was The Phil Kessel show last night.

He didn't play much in the 3rd you mean, right? If he sat the 3rd out, i'll be calling the league to rescind his 4th point that is listed on a 3rd period goal. "A performance for the ages" might be a little strong imo, though i'm only basing this on hearing that he had a pretty good game. I think i'd have seen and heard a lot more if this was really some out of this world game from him.

quote:Originally posted by CrockOShightI think it's time to start showing some respect for Phil Kessel!! He's the real deal (as I have been saying for 5 years).

I'm not sure what this respect for Kessel is that you seek? I've already said he's a PPG player, something you questioned at the beginnig of this last post, and something that is FACT as well. How can i argue this? I've also said i think he will remain a PPG player and maybe slightly better. I've even told you i pegged him for a 90ish point season this year? I've called him a high end offensive player! What more do you want???

I'm going to try yet again to explain where i'm coming from. Maybe i'm explaining this poorly? I don't think so, but perhaps someone else can chime in and at least let me know if what i'm saying is confusing. I don't care if you agree with me or not, but please, someone, let me know that this is at least clear as to what i'm saying. To summarize:

*Regarding the poll question, i think Kessel is the winner overall, but i'm not claiming it to be any sort of NYI sized craziness! If i were a Leaf fan, i'd have preferred a 5 year deal, but i understand this prob wouldn't have gotten the deal done.*I believe Kessel is a top notch / elite offensive forward in the NHL.*Kessel is already a PPG player, nothing to debate here as it's a fact.*I believe Kessel will continue to be a PPG player or better for at least the next 5 years.*By "better", i mean 90ish points, perhaps even pushing 100 if others around him improve and/or the Leafs aquire more help?*I do not think that Kessel will hit 110pts.....EVER. My opinion/guess only, based on the few who've done it in the last 10-15 years.*Though he may have improved other areas of his game, i don't feel he's elite anywhere other than offensively (aside from maybe his speed?).*I would prefer Jonathan Toews and his near PPG coupled with his all around game (leadership, faceoffs, defensive/two way game, etc) to Phil Kessel if i had to choose between the two.*I do not hate Phil Kessel and would love to have him as a Canuck under the right scenario (salary and cap hit).*If Phil Kessel comes to Vancouver on Saturday night and puts up 3G's and 3A's, my opinion and predictions for him will not suddenly change, just as they haven't during this current tear he's on.

I'm sure i'm missing some points/opinions i've shared, but hopefully this clears things up Crock as you seem to have been unable to grasp my point(s).

JOSHUACANADA

Posted - 10/30/2013 : 14:05:59 What you mean players go on cold streaks, much like they do for hot streaks? That's craziness your talking there, Nuxfan! Based on what some Toronto fans think Kessel is immune to this. Kessel's 4 point night last night, 150ish games of ppg status and the fact he is definitely, definitely gonna increase in ppg totals by significant amounts to justify his $8 million over 8 years max contract. Now I am gonna go to Kmart and come home and watch Whopner! Cue the Rainman

nuxfan

Posted - 10/30/2013 : 10:51:16

quote:Originally posted by The Duke

Going off topic........nuxfan and Alex .....why didn't van. Re-sign mason Raymond ??......big loss for the Canucks and big gain for the leafs.....damn I love his play for the leafs so far....he plays the game so smart, plus with speed and skill.

They didn't resign him because he was wildly inconsistent, and he would have cost too much. He had several years to prove himself, but could not maintain any level of consistency. He was also making 2.2 million, and was unlikely to stay for much less. TOR got him for a very reasonable salary, and only after every other team passed on him as well. I believe TOR was the only team to offer him a tryout

I liked Raymond, he ha some skill and great speed. When he is on, he is very good. when he is cold, he is not very useful

CrockOShight

Posted - 10/30/2013 : 09:30:10 Awesome Alex.

So, I just want to summarize your argument here. You're asking me not to use a sample size of... (how long has it been... 150 straight games that Phil Kessel has been at a PPG pace?).

But then, your main argument against hinges on ONE PLAY. One play which seems to be debatable on top of it..

Sure, the Oilers completely suck this year. But that doesn't take away from Phil Kessel's performance from last night. He just absolutely ruined The Oilers. That was a performance for the ages. The only reason he didn't put up 6 points, is because he didn't play in the third. It was The Phil Kessel show last night.

I think it's time to start showing some respect for Phil Kessel!! He's the real deal (as I have been saying for 5 years).

Alex116

Posted - 10/29/2013 : 22:25:12

quote:Originally posted by CrockOShight

I'm going to go ahead and guess that you guys *didn't* watch the Leafs-Oilers aka "Phil Kessel Show" last night. Probably too busy trolling hockeydb.com to see that Michel Goulet "only scored 106 points when he was 28". Wooooowww.

You're correct! I didn't watch the game tonight. Luckily for me, i'm not force fed midweek Leafs vs Oilers games like I am Leaf games pretty much EVERY Saturday, cuz as a hockey fan, I prob would have watched!

quote:Originally posted by CrockOShightAlex, exactly what "test" did I fail? I thought the question was: which players achieved PPG before 27; and then did so later in their careers. Wasn't that the question?

Are you guys applauding yourselves because Michel Goulet "only" scored 106 points when he was 28? Peter Forsberg had his best year at 24 - oh, and then went on to have a million great seasons after that until his retirement - but this is all supposed to mean something?

The "test" you failed, was obviously misread/misunderstood on your part. It wasn't to find guys who had PPG before 27 then did so later. It was "name guys who hit PPG status prior to 27, who went on to significantly increase their performance between the ages of 27 and 31?". Basically, find some guys who had 80ish points at age 20-25 and then became 100+point guys when they were 27-30. There are very few.The significance of this is that because Kessel is PPG already (at a relatively young age), doesn't mean he's going to increase that automatically like you seem to imply. You're implying that because he's not in his "prime years" yet, that he's more likely than not to increase his numbers as he hits 27-30. Nuxfan was pointing out that not many guys do this so odds are that Kessel won't have this massive 25 point increase. Don't get me wrong, he could, it's just not as likely as you make it seem by saying things like "it's a good bet" that he will do this. Hopefully this clears things up?

quote:Originally posted by CrockOShightYou guys *really* missed the point. I never said that Phil Kessel was a "lock" for a progression. I said that he was an "extremely good bet". And, if you had actually been watching hockey last night like I did - you would be nodding your heads and agreeing with me. Phil Kessel COMPLETELY dominated last night. Oh, and look at that. 2nd in League Scoring. Thanks for coming out.

I said that I'm going to guess that Kessel has a 110 point season in 2016-2017 - but I fully admit that I could be way wrong on that one.

Okay, this is what I was talking about. You said he was "an extremely good bet", and as I just explained above, I don't agree. I wouldn't go running off to bet that if I were you, that's all. I already said, he'd likely increase his PPG status but I just don't see 110 in the cards. I too could be "way wrong" as i'm not a genie and can't tell the future. We could wake up a year from now and Kessel could be outscoring and outperforming Crosby for all we know? I wouldn't bet on that either, but you get my point, right? As for tonight, had I been watching, I can guarantee you I wouldn't be "nodding my head in agreement". A 4 point night against a poor defensive team with a 3rd string goalie with just a handful of games under his belt doesn't change my mind. Nice night for sure and 4 points is 4 points, but that and 2nd in scoring after a dozen or so games does not suddenly make me feel like the Leafs won this deal, which is what this is all about, remember?

quote:Originally posted by CrockOShightSo...... if Kessel goes the way of Mats Sundin, and "only" has 8 straight seasons of 70-point + hockey... ummm. Yeah. This is a waste of my time.

If this happens, whether or not you're wasting your time, you shouldn't be happy with his deal. If he doesn't get over and stay over PPG status for at least 4 or 5 years, 8M a year would have to be considered ridiculously overpaid!!! Would you not agree?

quote:Originally posted by CrockOShightAlex, do you play hockey? It doesn't sound like it. I'd rather not make any judgements despite your repeated vitriol directed at me... But come on. Dude. It wasn't a 2-on-1. It was a guy coming down on the wing in a SHORT-HANDED situation. You give the guy the shot from the outside. 96 times out of 100 the goalie makes the save. Life goes on. I can't see how you are taking Kessel to task on this. It was one play - a nice play by the opposition - and it meant nothing. There's no analysis to be done there. Nothing to discuss. Kessel's stick broke. Dubinsky made a nice shot. Life goes on.

I no longer play hockey, though I did. Regardless of that, you don't need to have ever picked up a stick to know what a 2 on 1 is my friend. It may not be a clear cut 2 on 1 from center ice as Kessel is doing his best to close in on the 2nd guy, but it's a 2 on 1 nonetheless. Have another look, and pause the clip at :09 seconds and tell me it wasn't a 2 on 1 that was played rather well defensively by Franson. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=19o9Vc-8Jrg&list=TL8FVlRcbmVlSGkIEiCvHgfu6M9sfDsuH0You are totally correct that Dubinsky made a great shot and that a goalie would stop this most of the time or the shooter would miss. Pretty much a perfect shot. Where you're totally wrong is that it wasn't just merely a guy coming down the wing in a short handed situation. Here's the thing, I complimented Franson on his defensive play here yet if it were simply a guy coming down the wing, he played it horribly. Why wouldn't he go to the guy and not let him have the shot? Oh, maybe because it's almost a guarantee that Dubinsky would have slid the puck over to Letestu for an easy tap in? Seriously, you're questioning my hockey knowledge and you can't even see this? I'm a little horrified to be honest. "Life goes on"? Yeah, great attitude towards the play. It may not seem like much, but in the end, like it or not Kessel made the wrong choice. Had he turned around and skated back immediately, even without a stick he could have defended Letestu to the point that Franson would have been free to "take the shot away" from Dubinsky.

quote:Originally posted by CrockOShightHere you guys are - in the midst of completely eating your own dirty socks for breakfast. Kessel is on a veritable tear. 10 points, 6 goals in 4 games. And you guys are LITERALLY grasping at straws - "oooh aaah... Kessel broke his stick blah blah blah." "Brendan Shanahan was merely a PPG Hall-of-Famer for the rest of his career (but his BEST season was when he was 25) blah blah blah." You sound absolutely ridiculous.

And yes Alex. I realize that I do too. I am responding to this insanity.

How am I eating my words? Because Kessel is on a tear right now? 4 or 5 games makes this contract a good one? Huh? Why didn't Sam Gagner get 8+ million for his 15 points in 5 games?

quote:Originally posted by CrockOShightJust, do us all a favour. Okay? Please. Watch the highlights from last night. The Game is now on the NHL GameCentre vault entitled "The Phil Kessel Show". If that wasn't proof enough for you... well, then I can't help you. And, I want to be in your Pool. I'll be picking Phil Kessel in the Fourth round while you're still jumping up and down because you drafted OEL.

I already saw the highlights and I don't think they do Kessel justice actually. From what I heard, he was dominant, but seeing highlights of his goals and assists isn't enough to show he dominated. BTW, i'm not questioning it, I just don't think seeing the highlights is enough. Thing is, even if he did dominate, it's still one game against a poor defensive team. It's not going to change my mind. I won't suddenly think Kessel will score 110 points nor will I think the Leafs are the winner in this deal. As for my pool, you won't be picking Kessel in the 4th round. He went top 10 in 2 of the pools i'm in (the others have goalies so he went a little lower) so you'd likely be missing out on him. If you are plucking him in the 4th round of your pools, I want in them! BTW, I don't care if he's picked 1st overall in a pool. I've never been in a pool that gives points for defense so he's definitely a high pick.

quote:Originally posted by CrockOShightWould you like to tell us how many points you think Kessel will finish with at the end of this year?

Well, on my pre-draft (pool) list, I had him pegged for around 90, however, after reading your post and the subsequent excitement you've exuded, i'd have to say 140?

Alex, exactly what "test" did I fail? I thought the question was: which players achieved PPG before 27; and then did so later in their careers. Wasn't that the question?

Are you guys applauding yourselves because Michel Goulet "only" scored 106 points when he was 28? Peter Forsberg had his best year at 24 - oh, and then went on to have a million great seasons after that until his retirement - but this is all supposed to mean something?

You guys *really* missed the point. I never said that Phil Kessel was a "lock" for a progression. I said that he was an "extremely good bet". And, if you had actually been watching hockey last night like I did - you would be nodding your heads and agreeing with me. Phil Kessel COMPLETELY dominated last night. Oh, and look at that. 2nd in League Scoring. Thanks for coming out.

I said that I'm going to guess that Kessel has a 110 point season in 2016-2017 - but I fully admit that I could be way wrong on that one.

So...... if Kessel goes the way of Mats Sundin, and "only" has 8 straight seasons of 70-point + hockey... ummm. Yeah. This is a waste of my time.

Alex, do you play hockey? It doesn't sound like it. I'd rather not make any judgements despite your repeated vitriol directed at me... But come on. Dude. It wasn't a 2-on-1. It was a guy coming down on the wing in a SHORT-HANDED situation. You give the guy the shot from the outside. 96 times out of 100 the goalie makes the save. Life goes on. I can't see how you are taking Kessel to task on this. It was one play - a nice play by the opposition - and it meant nothing. There's no analysis to be done there. Nothing to discuss. Kessel's stick broke. Dubinsky made a nice shot. Life goes on.

Here you guys are - in the midst of completely eating your own dirty socks for breakfast. Kessel is on a veritable tear. 10 points, 6 goals in 4 games. And you guys are LITERALLY grasping at straws - "oooh aaah... Kessel broke his stick blah blah blah." "Brendan Shanahan was merely a PPG Hall-of-Famer for the rest of his career (but his BEST season was when he was 25) blah blah blah." You sound absolutely ridiculous.

And yes Alex. I realize that I do too. I am responding to this insanity.

Just, do us all a favour. Okay? Please. Watch the highlights from last night. The Game is now on the NHL GameCentre vault entitled "The Phil Kessel Show". If that wasn't proof enough for you... well, then I can't help you. And, I want to be in your Pool. I'll be picking Phil Kessel in the Fourth round while you're still jumping up and down because you drafted OEL.

Would you like to tell us how many points you think Kessel will finish with at the end of this year?

JOSHUACANADA

Posted - 10/29/2013 : 10:34:03 What you forgot to mention Oilinontario was the fact that the 3rd line center Duke refered to in Bozak's, has a very large contract and is also a contributing factor to why Toronto wont likely be able to match Kessel with a premier #1 centerman. For the record Kadri might develop into a decent #1 centerman and should he be paired with Kessel, they are likely to see decent offensive stats together. I say should because it is unlikely they will be paired long term due to neither being proficient in 2way play. First full game pairing of those two is happening in the next few games as Bozak is out with an injury and Kadri has been promoted to the top line for the duration. Heres hoping they can prove the pairing is good, to justify a long term pairing.

OILINONTARIO

Posted - 10/29/2013 : 10:21:55 And he will continue to play with a third-line center. The Leafs are maxed out as far as cap space mainly due to the Clarkson and Kesel contracts. And don't say Kadri is the #1 center the team needs. He is filling in while Bozak is out.

The Oil WILL make the playoffs in 2014.

The Duke

Posted - 10/29/2013 : 09:11:06 Anyway, kessel is worth his weight in gold in Toronto, in my opinion. He is a special player which doesn't come along every day and the leafs are very lucky to have him. Excellent job by nonis to lock him up for 8 years.

You disagree nuxfan that kessel hasn't had his shot yet ?....come on,...really...have you seen the leaf teams he has been on for the last several seasons ???.....playing with a 3rd line centre on a nightly basis......kessels production , considering these facts , make him one of the leagues top elite forwards.

I'll ask you all a question.....how many NHL forwards can be a ppg player and be in top 10 scoring in 2 consecutive seasons with bozak as their centre ??

Going off topic........nuxfan and Alex .....why didn't van. Re-sign mason Raymond ??......big loss for the Canucks and big gain for the leafs.....damn I love his play for the leafs so far....he plays the game so smart, plus with speed and skill.

Alex116

Posted - 10/28/2013 : 22:25:17

quote:Originally posted by CrockOShight

ROFL.

This debate is ridiculous.

Nuxfan, what am I supposed to do? Find players who have hit PPG status before 27, only to increase it later on?

Crock, you completely failed Nux's test. Heck, half the guys you named were on my list of guys who didn't have career years in the 27-30 period so chances are they weren't PPG players before then who improved after!!! That wouldn't make a lot of sense. I think you might have misunderstood Nux's challenge to you?

Oh, and he randomly checked a few, so I checked a few others.....Guy Lafleur - Age 25 and 26 were his best years. 27 and 28 were good as well, but he certainly didn't have the 25point increase you predict of Kessel in that time period!!!Michel Goulet - Career best 121 at age 24. Very good 106pt season at 28, but from 29 on, never hit PPG again.Pierre Turgeon (why not go with another French player? lol) Career best 58 goals and 132 points at age 23. Barely a PPG player at ages 27-30.Where did you come up with these names? You couldn't be more wrong as none of the 6 that we've mentioned fit the criteria nuxfan was looking for. The way you mention at the beginning of your post what he's looking for tends to make me think you understood, however, your examples are far from what would fit the question??? I'm, confused at your responses. Personally I believe that Kessel will improve on his PPG status now, however, not by a ton and certainly not nearly by the 25 points you predict a few years from now.

quote:Originally posted by CrockOShight

I like that Kessel went over to the bench to get a stick. What are you going to do with no stick? I hate watching players with no stick skating with their wrists low to the ice like it's intimidating or effective or anything like that. No stick = useless. Get off the ice / get a stick. Anyway, like I said, it wasn't like there was a "major" threat there. It's a Power Play. Geez. You guys are critical (of only Kessel it seems). WWDSD? (What would Daniel Sedin do?)

You'd make a poor coach. Players without a stick can still tie up a guy enough to eliminate them from the play. In this case, Kessel could have tackled the guy and given up a PP which they may have killed? Better than the result they got isn't it??? AND, you may not think a 2 on 1 is a "major threat", but I think most coaches would. I'm shaking my head at what you must consider a major threat! As for WWDSD? Well, as a guy who's actually scored 40+ goals in an NHL season, he'd have prob just scored at the other end thus not putting himself in the position of having to choose between defending without a stick, or going and getting one? I kid of course. I don't know what he'd have done to be honest? But he's not the one who's got a history of being a "sniper only" nor does he have an 8yr 8 million dollar deal that's being discussed, so it's not all that relevant is it?

quote:Originally posted by CrockOShight

I'll give you one more reason why The Leafs "win" this contract. Jersey sales. #81 Kessel jerseys are FLYING off the shelves.

Really? You're gonna use this to justify his deal? Okay......

[/quote]

nuxfan

Posted - 10/28/2013 : 21:55:48

quote:Originally posted by The Duke

Alex, you can call my post silly if you want but those numbers against the bruins are correct. I picked that segment of hockey because it was a situation where a players true grit really shows.......it was a tough series for all involved and showed a players true colours when it was all on the line.

I have no doubt they are correct. I just don't put any faith in the comparison. If it helps you sleep at night looking at a 7 game stretch 3 years apart against 2 different teams in 2 different circumstances, and drawing a conclusion that fits your beliefs, then power to you.

quote:The sedins showed what they are all about in a real tough series.....Boston ain't San Jose...what the hell has San Jose won ?....ever ?.....

When the chips were down they choked.....played like p****s...this is why the Canucks will never win a cup with them....and you know it.

Up until that series, what had Boston won? And SJ is plenty tough, although you probably don't see them much. You can poo-poo them all you like Duke, but in the end, the Sedin's were a huge reason why VAN even made it to the finals. They didn't have a magnificent finals, nor did the rest of the team, yet they still took BOS to 7 games. Without the Sedin's there probably were no finals for VAN, perhaps not even a playoffs.

quote:Don't give me this what has kessel won ?...the leafs are just building a great team....he hasn't had his shot yet....ask this question in 5 years or so......the sedins had their shot and got pushed around like rag dolls.

He hasn't had his shot? He's been there 5 years, what is he waiting for? Guys that make 8M a year - in other words, "superstars" - should be taking and making their shots, not waiting for their shots.

I think I'll be waiting a lot longer than 5 years to ask this question....

CrockOShight

Posted - 10/28/2013 : 21:10:58 This is off topic... but omg. Did you guys just see that shift by Sedin-Sedin-Kesler-Hamhuis-Bieksa (?). That was like two minutes of pure domination leading up to a beaut of a goal. Fantastic!

Anyway, I just thought of you guys when I saw that.

JOSHUACANADA

Posted - 10/28/2013 : 18:30:10

quote:Originally posted by nuxfan

quote:Originally posted by CrockOShight

ROFL.

This debate is ridiculous.

Nuxfan, what am I supposed to do? Find players who have hit PPG status before 27, only to increase it later on?

I see you just randomly threw a few players onto the page and hoped for the best. A few simple spot checks:

- Forsberg: had his best year at age 23, with 116 points. Never matched it again, although he was a consistent PPG performer through his career.

- Shanahan: had his best year at age 24 with 102 points. Never broke 90 points again.

- Rod Brind'Amour: best season at 24 with 97 points. Never broke 90 again.

Thanks for playing, we have some parting gifts in the back.

To summarize, not many have achieved it, and I think the odds are against Kessel achieving it as well. He has a slim chance of significantly increasing his performance (ie, hitting 100+ points), and he has a slim chance of regressing to 60-70 points in the next few years. He is more likely to hover around PPG for his peak years - which is still an admirable feat and would make him valuable. If he can add some intangibles to his skill set, or win a Conn Smythe enroute to a Stanley Cup victory for TOR, then I'll be the first to agree that he's worth his 8M. Until then, overpaid.

One thing I agree with - this debate is ridiculous. We can agree to disagree, and I'll leave it at that.

Pretty much what I expected. 100 point players in the modern day are pretty special. You don't usually see a player come into the league for 5 or 6 years and up there point totals after that by 20-30% without other contributing factors. I am not saying Kessel is a career 70-80 point player/ 30-40 goal player, but to see him all of a sudden join the elite 50 goal / 100 point player crowd would take other contributing factors. Like say an Elite centerman of the Henrick Sedin, Spezza, Getzlaf, Malkin, Crosby variety, which the Leafs currently lack. If the Leafs bag or develop one of those then your cooking.

The Duke

Posted - 10/28/2013 : 18:12:41 Alex, you can call my post silly if you want but those numbers against the bruins are correct. I picked that segment of hockey because it was a situation where a players true grit really shows.......it was a tough series for all involved and showed a players true colours when it was all on the line.

The sedins showed what they are all about in a real tough series.....Boston ain't San Jose...what the hell has San Jose won ?....ever ?.....

When the chips were down they choked.....played like p****s...this is why the Canucks will never win a cup with them....and you know it.

Don't give me this what has kessel won ?...the leafs are just building a great team....he hasn't had his shot yet....ask this question in 5 years or so......the sedins had their shot and got pushed around like rag dolls.

nuxfan

Posted - 10/28/2013 : 17:40:39

quote:Originally posted by CrockOShight

ROFL.

This debate is ridiculous.

Nuxfan, what am I supposed to do? Find players who have hit PPG status before 27, only to increase it later on?

I see you just randomly threw a few players onto the page and hoped for the best. A few simple spot checks:

- Forsberg: had his best year at age 23, with 116 points. Never matched it again, although he was a consistent PPG performer through his career.

- Shanahan: had his best year at age 24 with 102 points. Never broke 90 points again.

- Rod Brind'Amour: best season at 24 with 97 points. Never broke 90 again.

Thanks for playing, we have some parting gifts in the back.

To summarize, not many have achieved it, and I think the odds are against Kessel achieving it as well. He has a slim chance of significantly increasing his performance (ie, hitting 100+ points), and he has a slim chance of regressing to 60-70 points in the next few years. He is more likely to hover around PPG for his peak years - which is still an admirable feat and would make him valuable. If he can add some intangibles to his skill set, or win a Conn Smythe enroute to a Stanley Cup victory for TOR, then I'll be the first to agree that he's worth his 8M. Until then, overpaid.

One thing I agree with - this debate is ridiculous. We can agree to disagree, and I'll leave it at that.

CrockOShight

Posted - 10/28/2013 : 17:00:05 ROFL.

This debate is ridiculous.

Nuxfan, what am I supposed to do? Find players who have hit PPG status before 27, only to increase it later on?

I like that Kessel went over to the bench to get a stick. What are you going to do with no stick? I hate watching players with no stick skating with their wrists low to the ice like it's intimidating or effective or anything like that. No stick = useless. Get off the ice / get a stick. Anyway, like I said, it wasn't like there was a "major" threat there. It's a Power Play. Geez. You guys are critical (of only Kessel it seems). WWDSD? (What would Daniel Sedin do?)

--

I'll give you one more reason why The Leafs "win" this contract. Jersey sales. #81 Kessel jerseys are FLYING off the shelves.

quote:Originally posted by CrockOShightJoshua - I agree that NO player should be offered a contract that is over 5 years in length. That's actually something the owners wanted to enforce in the new CBA agreement during the lock-out. They didn't get it of course, and now here we are. 1. Any other team in the NHL would have snapped up Kessel on the FA market. Kessel and Kessel's agent wanted long-term. The Leafs didn't have a choice about the term. I fundamentally agree that NO contract should be over 5 years.

Hey, don't look now, but we agree on something! Lol. Not the "any other team" part, but the 5 year max part!

quote:Originally posted by CrockOShight

2. BUT, what the owners got instead was the compliance buy-out. In an absolute nightmare scenario - if Phil Kessel goes completely AWOL a la Scott Gomez - the Leafs buy out the last three years of the contract. I believe it's 50% of whatever is remaining. For a conglomerate like Maple Leaf Sports - I don't think they're worried about that kind of exposure at all.

Ummm, correct me if i'm wrong and i may just be as i didn't follow the CBA stuff too closely, but didn't each team get 2 compliance buyouts? And don't both have to be used by the end of next summer? And didn't Toronto already use their two on Komisarek and Grabovski? Unless it's another buyout situation i'm missing that you speak of, the Leafs are stuck with this deal unless they can trade it or the rules change?

quote:Originally posted by CrockOShight

Alex - Mr. Troll ;) - Like I said to your "Internet Troll Brother" Nuxfan - great. You've found some exceptions. That's great. It IS indeed interesting that Wayne Gretzky produced more when he was a member of the Coffee/Messier/Kurri/Anderson Oilers than as a King. Good stuff.

1. I'll even give you guys 10%. 10% of players produce more at ages other than 27-30. Or even 20%!! Heck, I'll give you Trolls 25% just because I'm feeling super generous. That STILL means that 75% score more during their Prime.

Keep in mind, i only looked at a handful of players i considered to be above avg. If you're looking at EVERY player to play the game and are going to tell me some 3rd liner averaged 30pts instead of 25 between 27-30 i'm not gonna buy into your numbers. What i'm getting at is it's only fair to guage guys who had significant numbers and significant peak years and when they occured. I don't have the info in front of me, nor the time or desire to research it but your 25% "Troll generosity" could still be questioned. It might be less i suppose, but it could also be more.

quote:Originally posted by CrockOShight

2. I said from the very beginning: "Nothing in life is for sure."Same goes for Kessel. I'm not saying that it's for sure. I'm saying that Kessel is a good candidate to have a 110-point season at least once in his career. Good candidate. Good bet. Not "for sure". Even Sidney Crosby isn't a "for sure".

Kessel's back-checking. So, Kessel, on the PP, drifts into the slot and rips a prime opportunity SOG... except his stick shatters. Dubinsky picks up the puck. Barrels down the ice, scores a shortie off of an unbelievable slap shot from the circles.

How can Kessel be blamed for that? Dubinsky was being watched by two Leafs (Phaneuf and JVR I believe). He took an incredible shot. Bernier probably should have had it. But, come on. A broken stick. Even Crosby has broken sticks.

It was a nice shot (wrist shot actually), absolutely. However, keep in mind i'm just using this as an example, Dubinsky could have threaded the puck through on the two on one to Letestu instead of shooting. Again, this is just theoretically. Where you see 2 Leafs watching Dubinsky is beyond me. The Dman who's back (Franson i believe?) does a good job taking away the pass and Dubinsky beats Bernier short side with a nice shot. JVR is floating back in looking disinterested and Kessel, admittedly husselling, took a very poor route via his bench to get new lumber! Bad move. Hard to argue it really. If he had gone straight back and defended the body of Letestu, it would have left Franson to be able to close in on Dubinsky and take away the shot as it would have been a standard 2 on 2. Watch again if you so please - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=19o9Vc-8Jrg&list=TL8FVlRcbmVlSGkIEiCvHgfu6M9sfDsuH0

quote:Originally posted by CrockOShightThe announcers calling out Kessel is EXACTLY what I am talking about. Pierre McGuire ALWAYS puts down Kessel (while praising Rick Nash). All I've got to say about that isA.) They are wrong. B.) You're big boys. You can make up your mind for yourselves. C.) That has happened throughout Kessel's entire career. Put down and doubted. I've read some interesting literature about Phil Kessel. And he is - along with Martin St.Louis - the most "stigmatized" player in the NHL.

That's why I'm on this thread trying to change your minds about it. It's not right. The announcers are confusing confidence with skill.

There may be the problem, i actually don't mind McGuire! Lol, i know i'm in the minority, but just saying. And it's not just him i've heard stuff from so either everyone has this hate-on for Kessel that you speak of, or mayber there is a little work needed on his 2 way game???

Crock, for the last time (hopefully), i don't hate Kessel or what he brings to the table. I don't think this is one of the worst contracts ever or anything to that regard. I don't even think it's the worst the Leafs have (ahem, Clarkson) or not even necessarily close. In fact, i even said that the Leafs kinda had to sign him as they'd have lost him for nothing had they not. Sorta forced their hand somewhat. So, IMO, Kessel won this deal. He is going to get 8M per season for the next 8 years!!! WHAT IF, he gets lazy and uninterested and becomes a 60pt guy cashing his paycheque and absorbing the boos that would follow? Very unlikely, but just using it as an example. He's guaranteed that money, the Leafs are guaranteed very little. Kessel wins.

nuxfan

Posted - 10/28/2013 : 14:01:54

quote:Originally posted by CrockOShight2. BUT, what the owners got instead was the compliance buy-out. In an absolute nightmare scenario - if Phil Kessel goes completely AWOL a la Scott Gomez - the Leafs buy out the last three years of the contract. I believe it's 50% of whatever is remaining. For a conglomerate like Maple Leaf Sports - I don't think they're worried about that kind of exposure at all.

Compliance buyouts end next summer, and they are a special form of buyout. Normal buyouts are at 66% of remaining salary spread over 2x the remaining years plus a penalty for cap circumvention, and they count against the cap. In your buyout example, Kessel would cost the Leafs 12M, and they would take a cap hit of roughly 4M in each of the next 3 years, and 2M in each of the following 3 years. I don't think the Leafs are interested in that kind of "exposure".

quote:Alex - Mr. Troll ;) - Like I said to your "Internet Troll Brother" Nuxfan - great. You've found some exceptions. That's great. It IS indeed interesting that Wayne Gretzky produced more when he was a member of the Coffee/Messier/Kurri/Anderson Oilers than as a King. Good stuff.

1. I'll even give you guys 10%. 10% of players produce more at ages other than 27-30. Or even 20%!! Heck, I'll give you Trolls 25% just because I'm feeling super generous. That STILL means that 75% score more during their Prime.

Crock, you never answered my challenge - how many players that have hit PPG status prior to 27, go on to significantly increase their performance between the ages of 27 and 31?

Because that is what you are counting on with Kessel. I think we can all agree that if Kessel continues at his current clip, this deal will not be worth it in the end. To make this deal work, he has to go beyond what he's already done, probably hit the 100 point mark at least once.

So, how many can you find? I'm curious. I already gave you Daniel and Henrik Sedin. Anyone else? I think you will find that the number is shockingly small, likely quite a bit under 10%.

quote:2. I said from the very beginning: "Nothing in life is for sure."Same goes for Kessel. I'm not saying that it's for sure. I'm saying that Kessel is a good candidate to have a 110-point season at least once in his career. Good candidate. Good bet. Not "for sure". Even Sidney Crosby isn't a "for sure".

Some things are for sure - for exmaple, Kessel will collect 8M in each of the next 8 seasons, regardless of what he does or how many points he gets.

quote:Kessel's back-checking. So, Kessel, on the PP, drifts into the slot and rips a prime opportunity SOG... except his stick shatters. Dubinsky picks up the puck. Barrels down the ice, scores a shortie off of an unbelievable slap shot from the circles.

Broken sticks happen all the time, no blame. But what the player does after the broken stick? A defensively minded forward would skate back right away and assume a defensive stance once the puck was lost in the offensive zone, or would go to the bench and get off the ice in exchange for another player. Kessel stalls, waits to see what will happen, then when the play is leaving in front of him he skates back to the bench to get a new stick, taking himself completely out of the play, and then finds himself behind the play when the shot goes in.

Kessel's fault? No, it was a great shot and as you say there were other players that could have done more. Did Kessel try to do anything substantial to prevent it? No.

CrockOShight

Posted - 10/28/2013 : 09:43:04 Well thank you Joshua and Alex. I appreciate the discussion.

Joshua - I agree that NO player should be offered a contract that is over 5 years in length. That's actually something the owners wanted to enforce in the new CBA agreement during the lock-out. They didn't get it of course, and now here we are.

1. Any other team in the NHL would have snapped up Kessel on the FA market. Kessel and Kessel's agent wanted long-term. The Leafs didn't have a choice about the term. I fundamentally agree that NO contract should be over 5 years.

2. BUT, what the owners got instead was the compliance buy-out. In an absolute nightmare scenario - if Phil Kessel goes completely AWOL a la Scott Gomez - the Leafs buy out the last three years of the contract. I believe it's 50% of whatever is remaining. For a conglomerate like Maple Leaf Sports - I don't think they're worried about that kind of exposure at all.

Alex - Mr. Troll ;) - Like I said to your "Internet Troll Brother" Nuxfan - great. You've found some exceptions. That's great. It IS indeed interesting that Wayne Gretzky produced more when he was a member of the Coffee/Messier/Kurri/Anderson Oilers than as a King. Good stuff.

1. I'll even give you guys 10%. 10% of players produce more at ages other than 27-30. Or even 20%!! Heck, I'll give you Trolls 25% just because I'm feeling super generous. That STILL means that 75% score more during their Prime.

2. I said from the very beginning: "Nothing in life is for sure."Same goes for Kessel. I'm not saying that it's for sure. I'm saying that Kessel is a good candidate to have a 110-point season at least once in his career. Good candidate. Good bet. Not "for sure". Even Sidney Crosby isn't a "for sure".

Kessel's back-checking. So, Kessel, on the PP, drifts into the slot and rips a prime opportunity SOG... except his stick shatters. Dubinsky picks up the puck. Barrels down the ice, scores a shortie off of an unbelievable slap shot from the circles.

How can Kessel be blamed for that? Dubinsky was being watched by two Leafs (Phaneuf and JVR I believe). He took an incredible shot. Bernier probably should have had it. But, come on. A broken stick. Even Crosby has broken sticks.

The announcers calling out Kessel is EXACTLY what I am talking about. Pierre McGuire ALWAYS puts down Kessel (while praising Rick Nash). All I've got to say about that isA.) They are wrong. B.) You're big boys. You can make up your mind for yourselves. C.) That has happened throughout Kessel's entire career. Put down and doubted. I've read some interesting literature about Phil Kessel. And he is - along with Martin St.Louis - the most "stigmatized" player in the NHL.

That's why I'm on this thread trying to change your minds about it. It's not right. The announcers are confusing confidence with skill.

...and you may have noticed. When the Leafs were up 3-1 against the Pens with 1 minute left. Who was on the ice? Phil Kessel. Starting to branch off into other roles.

No, it isn't a perfect world - or a perfect contract perhaps. But Phil Kessel is a good bet. And Leafs' fans are going to be super happy having #81 sweaters on their back long-term.

JOSHUACANADA

Posted - 10/28/2013 : 06:28:20 Pretty bold statements made about Kessel going on here. 1 that he is the most valuable RW in the game then everybody but Ovechkin, maybe Perry and then that he is more valuable that either of the Sedins, who both sport the awards for league leading in statistical categories. It would be more apt to compare him to 1 dimensional wingers who have yet to score 40 goals and yet to acheive greater than 85 points. I dont think you can win the arguement that he is more valuable than a 100 point player with excellent 2way play and one who has 6 plus years of elite play. Kessel has yet to put up elite stats outside of goals score over a 5 years period, counting this one and last years shortened season.

Remember I have no problem with the yearly contract value, just the term. He is getting elite pay for the max term, but has yet to put up truly elite stat numbers while having a contract similar to some proven 100+ players and proven 50 goal scorers. He just hasn't proven he is worth max term and value. I don't think every team in the league matches this offer, but I agree there are teams who would.

Alex116

Posted - 10/27/2013 : 23:38:25 Man, I try to stay away from this and I still get dragged into it! Thanks Crock! Well, you're not the only one to mix nux and I up.

Duke, your posts are so silly that they make you look like an internet troll. Nux covered everything I would have if I deemed your posts worthy of a response, so consider yourself lucky he replied, because i'm not sure i'd have bothered.

Crock.... You are correct, most players prime could be proven to be 27-30. MOST. As nuxfan already pointed out, many don't follow that pattern. Here's a few others who i'd consider above avg players........J. Roenick, P. Kariya, K. Tkachuk, S. Fedorov, M. Recchi, T. Fleury, J. Nieuwendyk, R. Brind"amour, P. Bure.......I could find more if you want? Bure's a great example. His best statistical seasons were at age 22 and 23 (60 goals / 110 points and 60 goals / 107pts). Now, i'll admit, he went on to some nice numbers later in his career (ages 29 and 30 he had 58G/94Pts and 59G/92Pts respectively) as well, but this illustrates what nuxfan is saying about Kessel. There's just as much chance he's shown / is showing us his best years today as there is that he's gonna put up this 50 goal / 110 point season you so boldly predict! Please keep in mind, i'm not saying Kessel WON'T meet these lofty goals you have for him, i'm just saying that it's hard to use these predictions to justify a current deal!!!

How about this name? Mats Sundin, a long time Leaf, had his best statistical years before 27, however, he was also very consistent throughout his career, something that nuxfan touched on in regards to Kessel. He could very well stick around a PPG or slightly better or worse for most of his career? Again, not saying he can't or won't get even better statistically, but it's not as much of a no brainer as you make it out to seem.

I wanna get away from this but here's a good name for you. How about this guy named Wayne Gretzky. Pretty sure by 27 his best statistical years had come and gone. Now, I don't wanna dismiss how good he was throughout his career and even after 27, but i'm just going by your numbers, ages, etc and pointing out that statistically, his best years were earlier in his career. Same could be argued about Messier really, though at 28 he had a really good year before the drop off happened somewhat rapidly.

Anyway, there's some more names for you to chew on in regards to your claim.

Lastly, I want to remind you that this is only an opinion I, and others, have in regards to the deal Kessel signed. Again, imo, he's too one dimensional to justify that kind of term and dollar amount for my liking. I know many Leafers claim he's improved his two way game and other facets of it, however, when I watched highlights the other night, the commentators were quick to point out a mistake he made when his stick broke and how he left the play as the opposition rushed up ice. He raced to get a new stick and in turn the other team (can't recall which game if it was last night or the CBJ one maybe?) got an odd man rush and scored. Good, defensively responsible forwards don't make this mistake and the commentators (TSN?) made a point of saying that Kessel still has a lot of work to do on the other side of the puck!!! Maybe when you're watching, the "homer" play by play guys don't mention this sort of stuff as much, being that they're more or less part of the team! Let's face it, all our teams play by play crew are homers to some degree. Anyway, just wanted to add that to the mix as it supports my argument of Kessel still being very 1 dimensional. If you're gonna be a sniper, you'd better be sniping 40 and maybe even 50 every season if you aren't gonna help out on the other end!!!

CrockOShight

Posted - 10/27/2013 : 23:35:40 How can you POSSIBLY say that Vanek is worth more than Kessel?

That might be the silliest thing I have read today. If you put Vanek in the same category as Kessel - then... I can't help you. I'm sorry, I've tried. But I cannot help you.

If you put Vanek in the same category as Kessel; then of course you don't understand why Kessel is getting 8 million. Vanek is not worth 8 million.

What we have been saying repeatedly - is that Kessel is a top-tier player. He is a Top 10 player in the league. He is a Superstar. He is a franchise player. Hence, worth 8 million.

Vanek is a strong second-tier player who is a Star. They are not comparable. To even have them in the same discussion is... disconcerting. Unproductive. Not even worth my time. I'm sorry.

By comparing Vanek to Kessel you've seriously undermined your hockey integrity. With all due respect. I think you need to rethink your Kessel opinion. Your "Kesselinion" if you will. What you just suggested - that Vanek is worth "more than" Kessel - is absolutely way off.

I apologize for my brevity; but there is no point in even discussing this. Kessel > Vanek. Everyone in this Forum knows that. Get that out of my house right now. Let's move on. Next!

nuxfan

Posted - 10/27/2013 : 20:01:50

quote:Originally posted by CrockOShight

quote:Nuxfan (not Alex) - you've come up with some questionable examples. Perry, Getzlaf, Staal, Ovechkin, Malkin - all still too young to decide "which year" was their best.

In S. Gomez and B. Richards - you just came up with the absolute worst contracts in the League. It's a pretty easy counter-argument to say "well, if SCOTT GOMEZ is worth 10 million; then Phil Kessel is EASILY worth 8 million..."

Getzlaf et al are all in their "prime years" as per your age definitions. By your measure, we've seen all we need to see, in the next 2 years they'll all hit 30 and start predictably trending downwards into oblivion. Unless you think they're going to smash through some new performance barrier this year or next, they will be all the proof you need.

Keep in mind, these are the ones I looked into by thinking about it for literally a single minute. I suspect that further investigation would turn up quite a few more examples.

quote:The other thing that you seem to be avoiding - is that ANY OTHER TEAM in the NHL would have offered Phil Kessel that same contract. (Obviously considering their Cap Space).

How do you know this? How can you possibly know what every GM in the league would have done? No wonder you think you have so many "facts" supporting your "argument"

quote:Kessel wouldn't have lasted a week on the FA market. The Leafs locked him up throughout his Prime. That's a great move by a club that seems to be moving in the right direction - lock up your assets. Build around them.

Locking up your assets is a great plan. Overpaying for your assets is not. There is a difference.

[quote]Kessel's contract is exactly in keeping with the trends and the values set by other players in the nhl

OMG, finally. An actual argument from Crock worth consideration.

It is certainly possible (and likely) that Kessel's contract will be used as a measuring stick for other players who come up over the next few years. If Kessel is worth 8M a year, is Vanek now worth 9M or even 10M when he's up this year? He's done all that Kessel has (and hasn't), and has more points to boot. He's only 28 years old, and so is in his "prime production years" according to the Crock-model. Of note, he's also another player who enjoyed is best season before 27 (84 points when he was 23) and then underproduced every year after that.

I certainly worry about the Sedin's upcoming contract negotiations given Kessel's contract. Its within the realm of possibility that they will get 8M a year each (for less years), which would cause no shortage of problems for VAN cap-wise.

nuxfan

Posted - 10/27/2013 : 19:55:35

quote:Originally posted by The Duke

Sorry, was going to add, just to clarify a bit more......since there is only one kessel....lets add the Sedins points together and share them equally for them both ( since there are 2 of them

Indididually againist Boston in a 7 game playoff series......

kessel srores at a rate of......... .857 %

The Sedins score at................ . 357 % ( broken down of course )OR.....has they did actually score in that series....

Nothing to argue about here....Chara played for both Boston teams.....both Boston teams were great....both Boston teams went to the cup final........but only 1 player stepped it up.....and his last name WASN`T Sedin.

Its funny Nuxfan, in an earlier blog you referred to the Sedins as Superstars......and to kessel has a star.....I guess these numbers I just posted proves that you have the Super in the wrong p[lace.

Of course, in Duke-land its perfectly natural to measure an entire career by the performance over a 7 game stretch... never mind compare 2 careers over 2 different 7 game stretches in different situations and 3 years removed...

One important distinction that you failed to mention Duke - the Sedin's were in the STANLEY CUP FINALS, while Kessel was playing in his first playoff round in 5 years. Other things you fail to mention:

- during that 2011 playoff run, the Sedin's were nearly PPG - even with the scoring drought they had in the finals. In the SJ series alone the Sedin's combined for 15 points in 5 games. Do VAN even make it to the finals without them?

- Over their careers there are both about 0.66 PPG through the playoffs. I thought about looking at Kessel's performance in the playoffs, but frankly his sample size is too small to be relevant.

When Kessel leads his team to the SCF, then we can start comparing performances. Until then, I know where the "super" belongs.

CrockOShight

Posted - 10/27/2013 : 16:55:11 The other thing that you seem to be avoiding - is that ANY OTHER TEAM in the NHL would have offered Phil Kessel that same contract. (Obviously considering their Cap Space).

Kessel wouldn't have lasted a week on the FA market. The Leafs locked him up throughout his Prime. That's a great move by a club that seems to be moving in the right direction - lock up your assets. Build around them.

Joshua - I'm sorry man. But your argument about H. Sedin being "more valuable because he has better playmaking abilities in a more contributibal position." ...is bizarre. I disagree that Cs are worth more than RWs. I used to think like you - but turn it around. Wouldn't it be just as easy to say "Well, there are fewer good RWs out there - therefore RWs are more valuable." (I could name 50 strong Cs out there. It would be much harder to do that for RWs.)

For the record, the best RW in the game today is Ovi. Followed by Kessel and Perry. Am I wrong?

In S. Gomez and B. Richards - you just came up with the absolute worst contracts in the League. It's a pretty easy counter-argument to say "well, if SCOTT GOMEZ is worth 10 million; then Phil Kessel is EASILY worth 8 million..."

So, Thank you for that. :)

Even putting that aside - like I already said - that tends to be the exception rather than the rule. MOST players tend to peak between 27-30.

Is it 100% for sure that Kessel's production will increase? No. But, given the trends, it's a very good bet.

And gentlemen - let's be clear. Kessel is better than either Sedin; and would be subsequently more valuable of the FA market. Which, is exactly what he is - that's exactly what happened.

How much are you willing to pay the Sedins when their contact expires?

Gosh. I feel like Kessel's agent or something. I'm not a Leafs' Fan. I have no affiliation. Nux and Alex - you guys obviously like the Canucks. Is it not possible that you are just refusing to listen to reason? Just because you don't like what you hear? Kessel's contract is exactly in keeping with the trends and the values set by other players in the nhl. Actually, he's under-valued IMHO.

But again, how much would you have paid Kessel?

The Duke

Posted - 10/27/2013 : 16:12:26 Sorry, was going to add, just to clarify a bit more......since there is only one kessel....lets add the Sedins points together and share them equally for them both ( since there are 2 of them

Indididually againist Boston in a 7 game playoff series......

kessel srores at a rate of......... .857 %

The Sedins score at................ . 357 % ( broken down of course )OR.....has they did actually score in that series....

Nothing to argue about here....Chara played for both Boston teams.....both Boston teams were great....both Boston teams went to the cup final........but only 1 player stepped it up.....and his last name WASN`T Sedin.

Its funny Nuxfan, in an earlier blog you referred to the Sedins as Superstars......and to kessel has a star.....I guess these numbers I just posted proves that you have the Super in the wrong p[lace.

JOSHUACANADA

Posted - 10/27/2013 : 16:05:56 Crock, you came to the discussion late and probably didn't notice I defended Kessel and his 8 million a year on the last page. I mentioned it was not a home town discount and also put it out there that 8 years at the max value was a team risk, which slanted it to Kessel's favour. I just thought the comparison to the Sedins was a valid arguement against Kessel's newly signed contract.

However, the Sedin's did not have statistical equal seasons for there first 6 years as you suggested. Henricks stats matured sooner than Daniel. Daniel had superior scoring stats, but Henricks ppg and playmaking skills are and have been superior to both Daniel and Kessel. He is extremly durable and has an ironman playing streak 500+ games long. The fact both players matured later has as much to do with where they played and the team they played for as Kessel's situation does. It was by there 4th year that both were elevated to the top line with Naslund that there ppg increased. This was at 24-25. Kessel has had the advantage of playing in Toronto for strong offensive teams primarily on the top line with decent offensive players at a younger age. There is as strong an evidence that Kessel has peaked, as there is the the Sedins will maintain a ppg pace, exceeding Kessel's ppg pace for a few more years.

I brought up the first 10 games because as of now Henrick is outpacing Kessel at ppg, is the better playmaker and is playing in a more contributing position than Kessel, while making less than Kessel's future contract value. Henrick on the open market is worth more than Kessel per year, while Daniel, who plays a more similar role and is keeping pace with Kessel, is of closer value, but neither will garner max value while playing together and likely neither will be signed near full value for 8 years like Kessel.

Now theres a true test playing againist a tough , tough team and facing Z. Chara ALL GAME LONG...has they all did !!!!!

So in conclusion.....in the same circumstances....1 Phil kessel ( all by himself ).....out-scores 2....yes, 2 Sedins together.....surprise, surprise....

That my friends is why kessel gets 8 million per.....and the Sedins don`t......kessels deserves it... ( as I said before, compared to other players salaries )..........in reality, I don`t believe any sport player is worth the $$$$$ they collect, but this is the world we live in.

nuxfan

Posted - 10/27/2013 : 14:41:44

quote:Originally posted by CrockOShight

Joshua, I chose Daniel arbitrarily over Henrik - because it really doesn't matter. Over their first seven NHL seasons, their production is almost completely the same (actually Daniel is a better match for Kessel - more goals, fewer assists). But again, over their first seven seasons - Daniel and Henrik are pretty much interchangeable here.

Daniel is the better comparison, he is the "sniper" between the two of them. They are not interchangeable, Henrik brings all the same scoring prowess, but adds very good faceoff skills and supreme playmaking ability. As a pure centre, he is more valuable than Daniel IMO.

quote:Alex, you mentioned that Daniel's best season was when he broke his ankle - because of a higher PPG. Okay, fair enough. All you have done there is to add credence to my argument. Daniel was 29 when he had that season. So, that's exactly what I was suggesting for Kessel - his "best" years should come anywhere between the ages of 27-30. I offered 2016-2017 as Kessel's "peak" year - when he is 29 - that's actually exactly what I wrote. I think that by pointing out Daniel's "best year was at the age of 29" - you've just underlined exactly what I just said.

You said that I have "no idea whether Kessel has hit his Prime or not". You are right. I have absolutely no idea. What I said is:

Based on everything we know about Hockey Players, and their production based on age, Kessel is an EXTREMELY STRONG candidate to have a progression over the next few years. Like I said, 27-30 is a player's "Prime Age". Kessel hasn't hit that yet. Like I said, "nothing in life is for sure"; but it's an extremely good bet.

Can you offer us any evidence to the contrary?

And, for another interesting exercise (I will do the same on my end) - find me a player who's production "dropped" after they hit 27 years of age. **There aren't many. And those that we do find will be the exception rather than the norm. Look at any NHL player's stats - and you will see that in general, they will "peak" between the ages of 27-30.

I am nuxfan, not Alex

I think if you look , you will find that there are many players that peaked before your magical age of 27. With less than a minute of thought, I came up with:

- Scott Gomez: his best season came when he was 26 years old, and its been downhill from then on.

- Brian Gionta: best season came when he was 27 years old, downhill since then

- Corey Perry: still too young to say for sure, but as of now, his best season was 2 years ago when he was 25 or 26. His previous 2 years have been downhill from there. He's capable of matching it, but I doubt he'll surpass it.

- Ryan Getzlaf: same as Perry, too young to say for sure. His best season was 4 years ago, when he was 24. While I think he might match that production again, I don't think he will surpass it.

- Brad Richards: had his best years at age 25, and matched it at 30, but never surpassed it.

- Evgeni Malkin: had his best statistical career at 23. Has come close to matching it, but IMO is unlikely to surpass even though he is only 27 now.

- Alex Ovechkin: had best years at age 22, unlikely to match again

- Eric Staal: had best year at age 20, then settled into a 70-85 point window. unlikely to match

quote:All this talk about Daniel Sedin, is to compare a player in their early career with similar numbers. Sedin didn't hit PPG status until 26. Kessel has already achieved that twice, AND, it is a safe bet to say that he will do so again - several times throughout the Prime Age of his career. We aren't comparing "who is better - Daniel or Kessel".

And again, to the main premise of the thread - is PPG enough to justify 8M per year? Just so we are clear - I too think Kessel will be around PPG for the next few years. I just do not think that a uni-dimensional player capable of PPG is worth 8M a year.

quote:Joshua, you still are kind of questioning my assertion that "Kessel is on the upswing, while the Sedins are on the downswing". But then, you are citing their performances over the first 10 games of the season. Ummm. First 10 games of the season. Look at the stats from the past two years. Kessel will outscore both Sedins this season. Again, nothing in life is for sure. But it is a VERY good bet to assume that Kessel WILL outscore either of the Sedins this season based on past trends.

Look at the stats from the past 3 years - and suddenly your whole "argument" goes out the window. You seem to be cherry picking particular statistical windows to make your point.

Crock, I would be happy to take a bet with you, today, that Kessel will not outscore both Sedin's this season (min 70 games played each). I don't have a lot of faith that you will honour the bet if you lose, but whatever. Let me know.

quote:Alex, the word "should" meant that "based on past trends, and everything we know about a player's Prime Age blah blah blah", we "should" see an increase to Kessel's production over the next couple of years. I believe that was very clear.

I have an exercise for you, and I suspect you will find very few examples - find players that hit PPG production before 27, and then saw their production increase by 20 points or more between the ages of 27 and 32. That is what you are suggesting that Kessel will do, so I'd be curious to know how many examples of this are out there.

Note - Daniel only did it twice.

quote:Fine. Both of you don't seem to like this contract (just like you seem to not like Kessel). But, why not?? I've just given a million reasons why it is an EXCELLENT contract for the Leafs. I haven't heard anything (based on HARD EVIDENCE / OBJECTIVE FACTORS) that would suggest otherwise. (Alex's vague notions of back-checking/leadership/every players is... vague at best. Give me something measurable here.)

I have not heard any hard evidence or facts from you to suggest that this is a guaranteed good contract for the Leafs either. I've heard some suggestions that Kessel's career is on the same trajectory as superstar Daniel Sedin (however, it could not possibly be on the same trajectory as Brian Gionta, Scott Gomez, or Brad Richards). I have heard that his production should go up because players generally peak between 27 and 30. This is not evidence.

There is nothing measurable to give. The only measure you will have is in 8 years time (or less if things go badly), and you can look back on what happened.

quote:There still seems to be a stigma surrounding Phil Kessel. It's almost like you guys don't believe that he can keep going at this pace. What in the world would suggest that to you???? Like, really? Did you see the game he played last night?? I thought he was First Star (I was disappointed they didn't even give him a Star). He was buzzing around the net all night long. He had a hattrick the game before that. He hasn't recorded a point in only two games this season. He is the go-to guy in Toronto - a team with one of the best PPs in the game. What is the world would suggest to you that Kessel "won't" keep up this production??

Again.... I have no doubt that Kessel will keep this production up. I don't think he will exceed it in any appreciable way over the life of this contract. Is PPG enough to justify 8M a year?

quote:So, if you don't like this contract so much. What would you say Kessel's "value" is?? Would you have accepted 7 million over 7 years?? Like, are we splitting hairs now? He is - and is going to be over the next 3-4 seasons - going to be a Top Player in the game. Isn't that what we pay our big players for?? Isn't that his value?? Where would you put his value??

Is 7M vs 8M "splitting hairs" in a cap restriction world? I had put his value at 6.5-7M on a long term deal. 8 years is fine for terms, he will still be young when the contract is complete.

CrockOShight

Posted - 10/27/2013 : 11:29:40 Joshua, I chose Daniel arbitrarily over Henrik - because it really doesn't matter. Over their first seven NHL seasons, their production is almost completely the same (actually Daniel is a better match for Kessel - more goals, fewer assists). But again, over their first seven seasons - Daniel and Henrik are pretty much interchangeable here.

Alex, you mentioned that Daniel's best season was when he broke his ankle - because of a higher PPG. Okay, fair enough. All you have done there is to add credence to my argument. Daniel was 29 when he had that season. So, that's exactly what I was suggesting for Kessel - his "best" years should come anywhere between the ages of 27-30. I offered 2016-2017 as Kessel's "peak" year - when he is 29 - that's actually exactly what I wrote. I think that by pointing out Daniel's "best year was at the age of 29" - you've just underlined exactly what I just said.

You said that I have "no idea whether Kessel has hit his Prime or not". You are right. I have absolutely no idea. What I said is:

Based on everything we know about Hockey Players, and their production based on age, Kessel is an EXTREMELY STRONG candidate to have a progression over the next few years. Like I said, 27-30 is a player's "Prime Age". Kessel hasn't hit that yet. Like I said, "nothing in life is for sure"; but it's an extremely good bet.

Can you offer us any evidence to the contrary?

And, for another interesting exercise (I will do the same on my end) - find me a player who's production "dropped" after they hit 27 years of age. **There aren't many. And those that we do find will be the exception rather than the norm. Look at any NHL player's stats - and you will see that in general, they will "peak" between the ages of 27-30.

All this talk about Daniel Sedin, is to compare a player in their early career with similar numbers. Sedin didn't hit PPG status until 26. Kessel has already achieved that twice, AND, it is a safe bet to say that he will do so again - several times throughout the Prime Age of his career. We aren't comparing "who is better - Daniel or Kessel".

You also mentioned that "a huge impact on Daniel's stats has been his brother". Right. Again, I think you are lending credence to my argument here. Daniel has been playing with Henrik this whole time. Kessel? Well, Tyler Bozak?? JVR seems to have found his home in Toronto - but that's THIS season. Two years ago, Kessel was scoring at a point-a-game pace - on a losing team with nobody on it. So, again, thank you for pointing that out.

Joshua, you still are kind of questioning my assertion that "Kessel is on the upswing, while the Sedins are on the downswing". But then, you are citing their performances over the first 10 games of the season. Ummm. First 10 games of the season. Look at the stats from the past two years. Kessel will outscore both Sedins this season. Again, nothing in life is for sure. But it is a VERY good bet to assume that Kessel WILL outscore either of the Sedins this season based on past trends.

Alex, the word "should" meant that "based on past trends, and everything we know about a player's Prime Age blah blah blah", we "should" see an increase to Kessel's production over the next couple of years. I believe that was very clear.

Fine. Both of you don't seem to like this contract (just like you seem to not like Kessel). But, why not?? I've just given a million reasons why it is an EXCELLENT contract for the Leafs. I haven't heard anything (based on HARD EVIDENCE / OBJECTIVE FACTORS) that would suggest otherwise. (Alex's vague notions of back-checking/leadership/every players is... vague at best. Give me something measurable here.)

There still seems to be a stigma surrounding Phil Kessel. It's almost like you guys don't believe that he can keep going at this pace. What in the world would suggest that to you???? Like, really? Did you see the game he played last night?? I thought he was First Star (I was disappointed they didn't even give him a Star). He was buzzing around the net all night long. He had a hattrick the game before that. He hasn't recorded a point in only two games this season. He is the go-to guy in Toronto - a team with one of the best PPs in the game. What is the world would suggest to you that Kessel "won't" keep up this production??

I was in the hockey locker room talking about this the other day with the guys. Somebody actually said, "it shouldn't have been a dime over 7.4 million."

ROFL. Are you kidding me!?!?

So, if you don't like this contract so much. What would you say Kessel's "value" is?? Would you have accepted 7 million over 7 years?? Like, are we splitting hairs now? He is - and is going to be over the next 3-4 seasons - going to be a Top Player in the game. Isn't that what we pay our big players for?? Isn't that his value?? Where would you put his value??

nuxfan

Posted - 10/26/2013 : 15:17:57

quote:Originally posted by CrockOShight

Daniel Sedin in his first six seasons:478GP, 119G, 187A, 306Pts. Age 20-27 (played one year in Sweden which was not counted).

Daniel's first season with a point-per-game pace was in 2006-2007 when he put up 84Pts in 81GP (36G, 48A) - when he was 26-years-old.

Daniel's first six seasons: 0.64PPG, 0.25GPG.

Phil Kessel in his first six seasons:504GP, 185G, 194A, 381Pts. Age 19-25

Phil Kessel's first season at a point-per-game pace was in 11-12 when he put up 82Pts in 82GP (37G, 45A) - when he was 24-years-old.

Kessel's first six seasons: 0.75PPG, 0.37GPG.

--

Daniel's salary after hitting PPG status: 6.1 M

Kessel's salary after hitting PPG status: 8M

I don't think you are arguing the correct point here. No one is claiming that Kessel is a bad player, or is not going to put up points. Rather, is simply putting up PPG numbers worth 8M a year?

quote:We know that players often reach their maximum potential (their prime) any where between the ages of 27 and 30. Actually, for Daniel, it was when he was 31-years-old - a whopping season of 104Pts in 82GP in 2010-2011. Great season.

Phil Kessel is currently 26-years-old. He hasn't hit his Prime yet. We do not yet know what that Prime will look like; however, all signs point to a MAJOR progression for Phil Kessel - especially in the next 3-4 years.

Actually, for Daniel, his best season was the season before, 09/10. He missed 20 games with a broken ankle, causing his total points to be lower, but his PPG was higher that season than the next.

You have no idea whether or not Kessel has hit his prime, or will get better than he is now - just because "most players" do so between 27 and 30 does not mean that Kessel will see any appreciable increase in his output. Perhaps he will be a PPG player over his career from here on out - good for 35g/40a a season. What then?

quote:

Daniel Sedin's best season came when he was 31. For Phil Kessel, that will be in 5 years. If Kessel is anything like Daniel Sedin (all signs throughout their career so far point to very similar numbers / very comparable stats); then when Phil Kessel, he is a virtual lock to score 50 Goals, and have a 110 Point Season at some point during his career. I'll even give you the year: 2016-2017 - watch for Phil Kessel to score 50, and put up 110 Points in 2016-2017. (Obviously barring injury).

You are missing one very important factor in Daniel's success over his career - Henrik. Having a twin brother that is also one of the best playmaking centres in the game today has a huge impact on performance.

quote:I don't think there's a debate as to whether the Sedins are trending downward. They are definitely trending downward. Sure, they are off to a good start this season. Hey, I wish them well. But, the signs say that they will both finish with around 70-75pts apiece. Good, but not a point-per-game.

They have trended downward from 100+ point seasons, to merely PPG, however that was always going to be expected, few players can maintain that sort of production year over year. They are getting older, and their production will decrease as the years go on. As for their production this year, both are on pace to finish over PPG again this season. What "signs" are you referring to that makes you think they will finish under PPG?

quote:Kessel on the other hand *should* put up 38 Goals, and 48 Assists - 88 points. Somewhere in the Top 10 in the League.

*should* because you think he will, based on some other "signs"? or *should* because he needs to, just to start justifying this contract?

JOSHUACANADA

Posted - 10/26/2013 : 09:23:46 I also find it interesting when you claim Kessel to be on the upswing and say clearly the Sedin are on the downswing, when in this early part of the season Daniel is tied with Kessel in points at 12, while Henrick is leading them both by 4 at 16.

JOSHUACANADA

Posted - 10/26/2013 : 09:20:30 Yet with all the evidence you brought, Daniel was playing for $3+ million per year at the same age Kessel signs his $8 million contract. I notice you didn't compare him the Henrick who has greater career stats and achieved them sooner than Daniel, who also played for $3+ million at the same age Kessel signed his $8 million contract.

CrockOShight

Posted - 10/25/2013 : 18:52:25Daniel Sedin in his first six seasons:478GP, 119G, 187A, 306Pts. Age 20-27 (played one year in Sweden which was not counted).

Daniel's first season with a point-per-game pace was in 2006-2007 when he put up 84Pts in 81GP (36G, 48A) - when he was 26-years-old.

Daniel's first six seasons: 0.64PPG, 0.25GPG.

Phil Kessel in his first six seasons:504GP, 185G, 194A, 381Pts. Age 19-25

Phil Kessel's first season at a point-per-game pace was in 11-12 when he put up 82Pts in 82GP (37G, 45A) - when he was 24-years-old.

Kessel's first six seasons: 0.75PPG, 0.37GPG.

--

We know that players often reach their maximum potential (their prime) any where between the ages of 27 and 30. Actually, for Daniel, it was when he was 31-years-old - a whopping season of 104Pts in 82GP in 2010-2011. Great season.

Phil Kessel is currently 26-years-old. He hasn't hit his Prime yet. We do not yet know what that Prime will look like; however, all signs point to a MAJOR progression for Phil Kessel - especially in the next 3-4 years.

In fact, for a player that already has five straight seasons with 30+ Goals under his belt before reaching his Prime age; Phil Kessel is a VERY solid bet to be a 40-goal scorer this year (Prime -1 Year); before REALLY lighting it up in 2-4 years' time.

Daniel Sedin's best season came when he was 31. For Phil Kessel, that will be in 5 years. If Kessel is anything like Daniel Sedin (all signs throughout their career so far point to very similar numbers / very comparable stats); then when Phil Kessel, he is a virtual lock to score 50 Goals, and have a 110 Point Season at some point during his career. I'll even give you the year: 2016-2017 - watch for Phil Kessel to score 50, and put up 110 Points in 2016-2017. (Obviously barring injury).

The Leafs signed Kessel throughout this entire "Prime" Period. Granted, Kessel's 32-34 years of age seasons (the last three seasons on his contract), we should see some regression. And, fair enough. We are seeing the same with the Sedins right now.

**The person who contested Sedin's regression, and then questioned Kessel's progression clearly doesn't look at stats. Daniel Sedin's stats have gone steadily down since that monster 104-point season - 67pts two years ago, 40 points last year; while Kessel's have just gone steadily up - 64pts three years ago, 82 two years ago, 52 last season.

I don't think there's a debate as to whether the Sedins are trending downward. They are definitely trending downward. Sure, they are off to a good start this season. Hey, I wish them well. But, the signs say that they will both finish with around 70-75pts apiece. Good, but not a point-per-game.

Kessel on the other hand *should* put up 38 Goals, and 48 Assists - 88 points. Somewhere in the Top 10 in the League.

But again, it won't even be this season. Not "yet" as they say. Not even next year. It will be in 2-4 years when Kessel puts his "big" season. Draft accordingly.

In any event, given Kessel's age and career stats up until this point - signing him through his Prime is an EXCELLENT move by the Club. Nothing in life is for sure - but this is the poker equivalent to pushing all in with the Nut Full House. It's a very good bet. One that any club in the NHL would have just been chomping at the bit to make.

Odds are that Phil Kessel is not only worth 8 million a season; but that he will be worth much MORE than that in 2-4 years' time. Therefore, the Leafs made an excellent deal here.

Posted - 10/25/2013 : 12:23:21 Slozo....First things first, i can take a ribbing as well as the next person. Do you get a sense i was really upset or something?

Anyway, i actually noted my mispelled word when i re-read my post and unfortunately didn't have time to edit it before getting pulled away from my computer. Unfortunately, sometimes work comes first. Regardless, i'm not one to usually care about online spelling / grammar and was in fact quite serious when i asked and noted the mistake. I'll be quite honest, i'm a high school grad with some college eduction but no degree, however, grade 8 for me was some 30ish years ago so i won't ever claim to be an English major. I will say that your interpretation of "soliloquy" still doesn't cut it. I have to be honest, i had no idea what one was so i had to look it up but either way, it doesn't really fit your use. Even the way you brought it up was quesionable..... "Alex, speaking of redundant soliliquies..." Huh? At what point was anyone speaking of such? Um, NEVER? Either way, the purpose of my post wasn't intended to lead to a debate about english spelling and grammar, and unlike you i don't wanna waste a ton of time arguing these small things.

Your post touches on a grand total of ONE thing i spoke of / asked, and ironically, it was one of the only points which had nothing to do with hockey. There wasn't a single reference to any of the hockey based points i made, just a retort about my mispelled word and an insult about my level of reading comprehension.

At least Crock had the decency to touch on the hockey based stuff we were discussing, such as whether or not Kessel is streaky, what his role is, etc. We may not agree on these things, but at least it wasn't an entire reply about the irony of me mispelling a word when mentioning you doing the same.I'll try to refrain in the future from commenting on these such things, but i find it hard at times because you're obviously far more intellectual than i judging by the words and phrases you use. "Soliloquies", "salient points", "lessons in decorum", etc, and that's just in this one post???

slozo

Posted - 10/25/2013 : 05:51:35

quote:Just curious, do you know what a soliloquy is? I ask only because you spelt it wrong and it really doesn't describe anything i said. Go look it up. Same with the grade 8 level of reading comprehension? Where did i say anyone had that? I only compared Crock's post to a grade 8 essay. How does that relate to anyone's reading comprehension?

Alex,Pardon my fast writing for the incorrect spelling of soliloquy . . . but talking about myself misspelling a word, and in your next sentence using the non-word "spelt" is . . . well, it's ironic, humorous, and kills whatever attempt you made at dissembling my point.

(FYI - spelt gets through a good spellcheck, as the only meaning of the word is an ancient grain - not as an alliteration of the word "spelled")

And it describes exactly what I meant: a long, overwrought speech, delivered/orated to oneself in front of an audience . . . usually used by thespians to describe a speech by an actor talking to the audience, as in the "Romeo, Romeo, wherefore art thou Romeo" speech by Juliet.

Your speech was similar to me, in fact; long, overwrought, WAY over-dramatic . . . and it didn't have a lot of substance.

You insulted Crock by calling it a Grade 8 level essay . . . and I retort in kind that I think you demonstrated a grade 8 level of reading comprehension in missing several salient points . . . and you act as if YOU have been the one attacked?

Do you understand now? Have we beaten this dead horse enough times? You get it?

I didn't want this to turn into an "insult-fest", but . . . if you can't take some ribbing right back in exactly the same way you delivered it to someone else, then you need a lesson in decorum.

"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug

nuxfan

Posted - 10/24/2013 : 22:39:20

quote:Originally posted by JOSHUACANADA

I heard that both were playing under Tortella occasionally off each others lines to mix it up and give Vancouver some flexibility in there lineups. I have also heard it said that when one twin gets injured the production of the other does not always drop off. I have heard it said mostly that either would take a discount if it meant they could play together. So my question is what happens if the Sedins get shopped individually and the buyer pays 8 million over 4 years for either or both individual contracts. Does this mean the Kessel deal is of value?

You sure do hear a lot of stuff about the Sedins!

There is not enough evidence that there would be prolonged success without the other, because they just haven't done it much in their careers. AV and Torts both split the twins up from time to time, but its rarely for more than a period at at time, just to shake things up. The time apart from injury is about 30 games in the last decade, they are generally durable players.

Like I said, the twins are unique. I don't think any GM worth his salt would trade for one and not the other - they are valuable on their own, but they are so much more valuable (production-wise) together. You probably see highlight goals from time to time, but you have to see them on a nightly basis to truly appreciate how they can dominate play for extended periods of time on intuition and perfect blind passes in a cycle. They are extremely skilled, and prolific scoring machines, on a consistent basis.

As for comparing the Sedin's to Kessel - there is very little comparison IMO. They are different beasts, at different stages of their careers. The Sedin's are 33 years old, superstars that will start to decline in 2-3 years time. Kessel is an up-and-coming star in the league, at 25 he has lots of years left, and all of them prime years.

The only thing that they have in common is that neither is worth 8M per year.